Emancipator wrote:The race is back on for total slam count and final GOAT status.

Federer is definitely not safe.

Even if Rafa gets to within 1 or 2 most people will consider GOAT to be very debatable.

Emancipator

Not sure it is entirely back on, especially if Fed defends Wimbledon. Now what would put the cats amongst the pigeons (which I don't see happening) is if Nadal won Wimbledon. That would really get the fires stoked.

20-17 I still think is a big gap. I think Fed would need to get to 22 to ensure the record is truly safe.

Depends really on how long Nadal stays in the game beyond Federer. That's really where he will make any gains. More so if Murray, Djokovic and Stan are done for.

Weren't they talking of using the on-court timer? When they do that Nadal will stop winning slams.

Only in the period 2008-2014 one could have doubts in that debate, when Rafa was 27 (with good years ahead) and was beating Roger in almost every match (15-4) and winning more slams (11-5)

but the low form of rafa 2015-2016 and the impressive comeback from federer 2017 (also in terms of their h2h) has brought us to a moment in which both careers are almost over and Nadal simply cannot match all Federer is doing.

He could get closer in slams, but isnt federer going to win more? I wouldnt bet my money, and what about WTFs? nadal has none, and federer 6

Nah, debate is over and I am sure Nadal is ok with his own records

In the end is also impressive from nadal that he achieved that much in the era of Federer and with Djokovic around in super form 2011-2016

Last edited by naxroy on Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:51 pm; edited 1 time in total

Emancipator wrote:The race is back on for total slam count and final GOAT status.

Federer is definitely not safe.

Even if Rafa gets to within 1 or 2 most people will consider GOAT to be very debatable.

Emancipator

Not sure it is entirely back on, especially if Fed defends Wimbledon. Now what would put the cats amongst the pigeons (which I don't see happening) is if Nadal won Wimbledon. That would really get the fires stoked.

20-17 I still think is a big gap. I think Fed would need to get to 22 to ensure the record is truly safe.

Depends really on how long Nadal stays in the game beyond Federer. That's really where he will make any gains. More so if Murray, Djokovic and Stan are done for.

Weren't they talking of using the on-court timer? When they do that Nadal will stop winning slams.

Shouldn't that point be on the other thread?

There was talk of one. I would imagine a lot of pressure would be placed on the idea to be scrapped. Not so much because my view would be Nadal would oppose a countdown pressure noise (like in pool) but because those who may not violate so much might succumb to the pressure of a noise when in essence serving is carried out in some form of silence. Not withstanding many parts of the media who would oppose it.

I'd still need a lot of convincing that speeding Nadal up between points would dry up his success.

More about Title Difficulty Factor at: http://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/about

Title Difficulty - Factor of difficulty to win the title compared to a difficulty for an average title winner to win an average tournament event of the same tournament level (first, probabilities to win the title for an average title winner of the same tournament level are calculated based on average Elo Rating of the title winners as well as Elo Ratings of the opponents actual winner has faced (P = 1 / (1 + 10 ^ ((AvgWinnerElo - ActualOpponentElo) / 400)); second, difficulty to win the title is calculated as the sum of inverse probabilities from the first step; third, title difficulty is normalized so that average difficulty of the same tournament level is 1)

I have to say this is akin to when me and my brother once tried to determine who was the Street Fighter 2 GOAT in our household. Despite me running through it at a difficulty rating of 7 stars with Ken, my brother would argue doing it at 6 stars with Dhalsim was more impressive.

Well, this is not strictly the case of arguing about opinions, here we can discuss actual specifics of the formula, what makes sense and what does not

For example, @bogbrush suggested 128 players are used, but I do not see this practical, as it would not represent cases when someone was awarded a cakewalk draw because favorites are out because of a bad day, or when underdog played a match of his life, just to tank in the next round (sounds familiar?)

Next we can talk if Elo should be used as bases for difficulty calculations. I chose Elo (as others do also), as there is no known better method of quantifying player strengths at some point in time then Elo.

Next we can discuss if overall Elo is used, or Surface or even Set Elo. I chose Overall Elo, as Overall Elo gives most predictability to tennis matches, a bit greater then Surface or Set Elo. Of course sometimes Surface or Set Elo are better, but in most cases in average, Overall Elo is better.

Further, we can discuss the difficulty weight for particular matches. I chose 1/P, where P is probability for an average winner to win a match, because 1/P represents bookmaker odds, and if it is good for bookmakers (which earn money based on odds), it is good for me too.

Finally, we can discuss whether sum of match weights should be used, or product of match weights. I chose sum, because product would yield to huge differences in title weights, in the range of 10:1.

More about Title Difficulty Factor at: http://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/about

Title Difficulty - Factor of difficulty to win the title compared to a difficulty for an average title winner to win an average tournament event of the same tournament level (first, probabilities to win the title for an average title winner of the same tournament level are calculated based on average Elo Rating of the title winners as well as Elo Ratings of the opponents actual winner has faced (P = 1 / (1 + 10 ^ ((AvgWinnerElo - ActualOpponentElo) / 400)); second, difficulty to win the title is calculated as the sum of inverse probabilities from the first step; third, title difficulty is normalized so that average difficulty of the same tournament level is 1)

I have to say this is akin to when me and my brother once tried to determine who was the Street Fighter 2 GOAT in our household. Despite me running through it at a difficulty rating of 7 stars with Ken, my brother would argue doing it at 6 stars with Dhalsim was more impressive.

Well, this is not strictly the case of arguing about opinions, here we can discuss actual specifics of the formula, what makes sense and what does not

For example, @bogbrush suggested 128 players are used, but I do not see this practical, as it would not represent cases when someone was awarded a cakewalk draw because favorites are out because of a bad day, or when underdog played a match of his life, just to tank in the next round (sounds familiar?)

Next we can talk if Elo should be used as bases for difficulty calculations. I chose Elo (as others do also), as there is no known better method of quantifying player strengths at some point in time then Elo.

Next we can discuss if overall Elo is used, or Surface or even Set Elo. I chose Overall Elo, as Overall Elo gives most predictability to tennis matches, a bit greater then Surface or Set Elo. Of course sometimes Surface or Set Elo are better, but in most cases in average, Overall Elo is better.

Further, we can discuss the difficulty weight for particular matches. I chose 1/P, where P is probability for an average winner to win a match, because 1/P represents bookmaker odds, and if it is good for bookmakers (which earn money based on odds), it is good for me too.

Finally, we can discuss whether sum of match weights should be used, or product of match weights. I chose sum, because product would yield to huge differences in title weights, in the range of 10:1.

We did compare and use a very complex set of metrics for a formula. For example:

A Hadoken vs Yoga Fire and we based what did more damage vs control pad complexity which we did with the other moves. We also took into account speed of the character movement and specific opponent damage for example Vega could get hit aplenty by a Ken Hurricane Kick. So it was pretty technical stuff.

Of course I was still anointed Street Fighter 2 GOAT and settled it with a Ken vs Dhalsim best of one.

Aye - but there's more to the question than the way you put it. Federer won Wimbledon just before his 31st birthday in 2012, and he did not win another slam until AO 2017 when he was 35. Federer faced Djoko/Nadal/Murray/Wawrinka taking it in turn to hit some pretty high peaks during that period. Provided he stays fit Nadal has much less competition. It's pretty likely that Nadal will do better than Fed's 0 score between 32-35

Likely indeed. Especially now they have given him a second clay-ish slam (actually even slower than that) and he's facing a competition at RG which is comparable with the Croation open in Umag.

Yes US may become the crucial slam in the race (they’ve always been the most corrupted) though I think Nadal won’t win any more.

If Rafa ends with 20 and Roger 22 - the difference of 2 at such numbers, in the view of many, will not be a determining factor in GOAT status.

If Rafa's total also includes another AO then he will have 2 at least of each. Such elements contribute to the debate (not to mention the dreaded H2H) and some would continue to argue in his favour.

Let's face it, as Federer fans we never imagined that Rafa, a comparative tennis 'pleb', would reach such heights - he is on the cusp of making this debate endless and unresolved conclusively to more than just the fringe of his hardcore supporters.

When Roger was ruling the roost I think most of us saw Rafa as just an annoyance (and moreso his fans), but now the threat has not only become real, but almost concrete and intractable, with the possibility that he gains the edge and goes ahead.

Roger knows he has to perform this summer - or his entire legacy is in danger of being devalued.

There are no points for coming second in the GOAT race; it's all or nothing. A competitor like Roger will fight tooth and nail to prevent Nadal from overtaking him. And so will Rafa.

as much as I would love rafa to win more slams... I find it more and more difficult

last year when he lost at wimbly I didnt have this feeling, I was sure he could do great at the usopen and he did, but after ausopen and specially after this clay season I have my doubts, it is true he won all torunaments entered but one, but it is also truth he doesnt dominate as last year, which makes me think he is slowly feeling the time in his shoulders

of course I will be very glad to be wrong

maybe he was less dominant on clay (not result wise, but in the way he played) due to the little competition he had behind due to injurie, that could be an explanation too

but what can he do to catch federer? first of all pray for federer to stop increasing his records, and then win how many more slams? 3-4? and then, how many WTFs?

I dont know, I just dont see it. he is running out of time and the circuit is at last refreshing with people that are meant to do great things

For all the supposed changing of the guard, this gen and next gen have accumulated 0 slams.

I won't bother with the lost generations.

Next genThiem - not a match for Rafa on clay and rubbish elsewhereZverev - not been past a quarter final yet (and mightily struggled en route against nobodies)Kyrgios - when did he actually do something.. ever.. oh that's right.. neverOther 21-24 yr olds have done so little I haven't even bothered to learn their names

So that brings us to Shap and younger - these guys will not be ready to beat Fedal at their favourite slams for another couple of years.

So in essence Nadal really has a clear playing field - only Federer to stop him - and he's ancient.

The changing of the guard has basically occurred purely because the top guys are old/injured. Let’s not pretend Zverev is (yet) playing at a level which would have won him three Masters 5 years ago. If Novak and Andy were still playing at their 2015-16 level, we would still be looking at every slam and masters being dominated by the big 4.

That said, I do think the current next gen (I.e. the guys 22 or younger) are genuine potential stars. Zverev isn’t that exciting but he’s clearly got potential to be very tough to beat if he can stay injury free. Shap and Tsit look like genuine talents and then we have the even younger FAA who I could easily see breaking the top 100 this year. I think the future looks bright but the present isn’t that exciting. As a non Fed fan, Wimbledon looks set to be one of the most boring slams I can recall.

Slippy wrote:The changing of the guard has basically occurred purely because the top guys are old/injured. Let’s not pretend Zverev is (yet) playing at a level which would have won him three Masters 5 years ago. If Novak and Andy were still playing at their 2015-16 level, we would still be looking at every slam and masters being dominated by the big 4.

That said, I do think the current next gen (I.e. the guys 22 or younger) are genuine potential stars. Zverev isn’t that exciting but he’s clearly got potential to be very tough to beat if he can stay injury free. Shap and Tsit look like genuine talents and then we have the even younger FAA who I could easily see breaking the top 100 this year. I think the future looks bright but the present isn’t that exciting. As a non Fed fan, Wimbledon looks set to be one of the most boring slams I can recall.

Woooooow, Slippy!

I can’t believe there can be anyone that does not like Fed.How is that possible?

It’s the same as saying stars are boring....

ntw, I agree with the u der 22 generation being full of exciting, genuine talent. How is that youngest long-named Canadian doing?Last time I saw a clip of him he was 15 a d spinning his fh too much for my liking...that’s how they teach them these days.

Nadal lucked out with the weather twice. But luck won't ;ast forever and he's getting older and slower year on year.

Emancipator wrote: wrote:The race is back on for total slam count and final GOAT status.

Federer is definitely not safe.

Even if Rafa gets to within 1 or 2 most people will consider GOAT to be very debatable.

Emancipator

Only if you are cretinous enough to think that dominating one slam and not the others - or even winning a tour end final event makes you goat.

I'm afraid that 6-1-8-5-6 beats 1-11-2-3-0 and will if that's 111 french opens. Goat is more than simple numbers and you are a retard for not understanding that.

Federer's record across all surfaces and events is far better than Nadal's - and that's before we get to the week n1 record. Also, please stop with the stupid signature. You're not an oracle or anyone important.

Daniel wrote:Nadal lucked out with the weather twice. But luck won't ;ast forever and he's getting older and slower year on year.

Emancipator wrote: wrote:The race is back on for total slam count and final GOAT status.

Federer is definitely not safe.

Even if Rafa gets to within 1 or 2 most people will consider GOAT to be very debatable.

Emancipator

Only if you are cretinous enough to think that dominating one slam and not the others - or even winning a tour end final event makes you goat.

I'm afraid that 6-1-8-5-6 beats 1-11-2-3-0 and will if that's 111 french opens. Goat is more than simple numbers and you are a retard for not understanding that.

Federer's record across all surfaces and events is far better than Nadal's - and that's before we get to the week n1 record. Also, please stop with the stupid signature. You're not an oracle or anyone important.

It is his thing, Daniel. He has done it for years and years. He loves himself.

Emancipator wrote:If Rafa ends with 20 and Roger 22 - the difference of 2 at such numbers, in the view of many, will not be a determining factor in GOAT status.

[…]

Let's face it, as Federer fans we never imagined that Rafa, a comparative tennis 'pleb', would reach such heights - he is on the cusp of making this debate endless and unresolved conclusively to more than just the fringe of his hardcore supporters.

I don't think so. That is certainly not how I have seen the views develop here in the US. The height of "Rafa may become the GOAT" fever was during 2008-14 after Rafa won Wimbledon and when it started looking like he might take over in total numbers. Since then, the typical narrative shifted much more into the "Fed best overall, Rafa best on clay", and it feels quite settled there.

I think what hurt Rafa most was that he was unable to contain Djoko's rise except on clay. It hurt him both in terms of numbers as well as the perception that pigenoholes him somewhat into a clay court champion.

I suspect that the proportion of people who think Rafa is the GOAT is smaller now than it was 4-5 years ago. I suspect Rafa afficionado par excellence Amri himself would be closer to giving Fed a nod now than back then.

This could still change if Rafa can surpass Fed's numbers. But he will have to do that in order to be viewed as the GOAT.

Last edited by summerblues on Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:55 am; edited 1 time in total

barrystar wrote:Each year I find myself re-setting the target for Federer as Nadal continues to defy attempts to write off his time as a slam winner.

Yes, but if you were a Rafa fan, you would probably feel the same. First, after the AO 2009, Fed was being written off but managed to add to his total by 2012 more than people had expected. Then in 2014, when Rafa won his 14th slam, it looked like Fed was done and Rafa still had a decent chance to add a few more slams. Yet we are here 4 years later and Rafa is no closer than he was then.

They have both been upping the ante on each other. I remember thinking in 2016 that they were both quite possibly done. I am glad Fed came back as strong as he did or else we would be having a much different convo now.

barrystar wrote:Each year I find myself re-setting the target for Federer as Nadal continues to defy attempts to write off his time as a slam winner.

Yes, but if you were a Rafa fan, you would probably feel the same. First, after the AO 2009, Fed was being written off but managed to add to his total by 2012 more than people had expected. Then in 2014, when Rafa won his 14th slam, it looked like Fed was done and Rafa still had a decent chance to add a few more slams. Yet we are here 4 years later and Rafa is no closer than he was then.

They have both been upping the ante on each other. I remember thinking in 2016 that they were both quite possibly done. I am glad Fed came back as strong as he did or else we would be having a much different convo now.

So true; any discussion of Fed's career is incomplete without discussing Nadal's and vice-versa - you can't really forget the huge part that Djoko played in both their stories during 2011-2016 wining 3 finals against each of them.

Daniel wrote:Nadal lucked out with the weather twice. But luck won't ;ast forever and he's getting older and slower year on year.

Emancipator wrote: wrote:The race is back on for total slam count and final GOAT status.

Federer is definitely not safe.

Even if Rafa gets to within 1 or 2 most people will consider GOAT to be very debatable.

Emancipator

Only if you are cretinous enough to think that dominating one slam and not the others - or even winning a tour end final event makes you goat.

I'm afraid that 6-1-8-5-6 beats 1-11-2-3-0 and will if that's 111 french opens. Goat is more than simple numbers and you are a retard for not understanding that.

Federer's record across all surfaces and events is far better than Nadal's - and that's before we get to the week n1 record. Also, please stop with the stupid signature. You're not an oracle or anyone important.

Oh dear, still so angry I can feel you seething from over here

It might be better for you to foe me - we wouldn't a repeat of your last implosion

Emancipator - Lord of the intergalactic universal multiversal multitudinal galaxies - may the serve be with you

Also, the person who loves himself.... if you think being way behind someone in weeks n1, and 3 of the 4 slams and year end titles makes you goat, then you may want to examine your thought process. That is unless you are just a troll.... Which seems to be likely. Sad.

Tennis is a lawn sport. It was always a lawn sport. Being able to retrieve balls from the baseline endlessly isn't tactical or what tennis is about. It's not even tennis.